By Carl Weinschenk
The Labor Day holiday and the start of school mark the transition from the midterms as something off in the distance to an impending event. Things indeed are getting real: States are mailing out their early voting ballots. It’s on, as they say.
Let’s look at six ways that Republicans are trying to keep the number of Democratic voters down.
Voter Suppression: There are many ways in which people who control the levers of power can abridge the rights of people who are on the outside looking in. It works on a number of levels. The Trump administration, which clearly is planning to use those levers, seems to have three interrelated goals: To suppress votes, to create enough confusion to make people think twice about voting and to sow doubt on the accuracy of the vote once ballots are counted.
Purging Voter Rolls: Purging voter rolls is the organized and deliberate removal of names. It’s important to think about it carefully. Completely legitimate actions can look like illegal disentrancement of legitimate voters. Purging voter rolls is an important tool to keep records up to date by removing deceased people, those who have moved and others who for some reason are not eligible to vote in a particular location. The best advice is not to assume a purge is good electoral hygiene or an effort to suppress. Be fair but cautious.
Limit Opportunity: Another way to reduce voting is simple: Make it harder to vote. There was big news in Texas on that front a week ago. The Tarrant County County Commissioners Court voted to cut the number of polling places from 316 in the 2022 midterms to 224 this year. Three of 50 early voting locations also were removed.
Tarrant County is large – more than 1.6 million voters – and growing. It’s not surprising where the cuts will be made. One report said the poorer areas of the county will suffer a loos of approximately 41% loss in polling sites while richer areas will see only a 15% reduction.
Mail Voting Hijinx: There has been a tremendous amount of news on the legal front concerning mail voting. To summarize, the Trump administration wants the courts to let it compel states to hand over voter rolls to the U.S. Postal Service. The USPS subsequently would play a lead role in determining who is a legitimate voter, who is not and in the general administration of the voting.
The slight problem with that plan is that it plainly contradicts Article 1, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution:
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
It’s been a legal back and forth. The latest is that Indira Talwani, a district court judge in Massachusetts, issued a temporary restraining order stopping the administration’s plan. The administration asked a federal appeals court to lift the order. It refused.
It’s not just a matter of legalities. The USPS simply is not ready. Multiple reports point out that the post office is rushing to figure out how to perform the gargantuan task of managing millions of mail ballots. A whistleblower claims that the agency is throwing together a system that is rife with errors and could create havoc if implemented.
The Redistricting Fight Slogs on: Redistricting is another means of suppressing the vote. It’s a bit different: There is no an effort to prevent people from voting. The goal is to make their votes count less. An extreme form of redistricting called gerrymandering redraws distinct lines in such a way that members of a disfavored group that previously lived in multiple districts are squeezed into one. That district is sacrificed in order to cement control of the districts where those folks previously voted.
Not only do the beneficiaries pick up House seats, but the politics within the district can become more extreme because the concerns of those shipped off to other districts need not be addressed.
The last two pieces of news on the redistricting front actually were positive. This week, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that a redrawn district that more or less gifted the Republicans an extra seat was unconstitutional. It ordered that the old maps be used pending a statewide vote. The Supreme Court has concured–twice as a matter of fact.
In Maryland, the state Supreme Court ruled that amendment can be on the ballot this November regarding gerrymandering in 2028.
SAVE and SAVE: The administration is throwing everything against the wall, hoping that some kind of suppression sticks, the vote is chilled or the results be questioned. Trump still is talking about Congress passing the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act and a database of the same name to which it is trying to gain access.
It’s even more confusing than the redistricting battles. USA Today explains:
While the two issues are often discussed together online, they are not the same. The SAVE Act is a congressional proposal that would require proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, while the administration’s SAVE database initiative focuses on helping states verify voter eligibility and citizenship records.
The innocent rationale for the SAVE Act is that it is a commonsense approach to ensuring the person is voting legally. Critics say it is a Trojan Horse that seeks in various ways to make life difficult for those who seek to vote. For instance, a woman who gets married or divorced would be at best inconvenienced and at worst unable to vote if her ID and the voting record differed. It perhaps is a problem for another year: The good news is the SAVE Act is stuck in Congress – not even Republicans approve – and almost certainly won’t be a factor in the 2026 midterms.
The administration is asking the Supreme Court to overrule a federal court and gain access to the SAVE Database (“Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements”). CBS says that the court had found that the administration had used it illegally. That battle is ongoing.
Voting is the Midterms is an Existential Responsibility
Hang in there. All of this nonsense should have a simple impact. It should strengthen the resolve of people to vote. If you have to travel to a polling place twice as far from your home as you did two years ago, do it. If you have to wait in line for hours to vote, do it. If you have to take a sick day from work in order to vote early, do it. If you have to stare down intimidating folks in battle gear, do it. Vote.